Closing the Silences - Using the ICJ’s Interpretive Method to Read Its Climate Opinion
Frydlinger, David
Author
aut
Text
xx#
2025
Verfassungsblog
2025-08-26
eng
At COP 30 in Belém, ministers will wrangle over how “sufficient” the new climate-finance goal must be, and whether “phase-down” of coal is a slogan or a legal trigger. In Brussels, the 2040 climate target faces the same test, while in Geneva, the WTO’s fossil-subsidy reform stalls over which tax breaks to cut. Read through a strict consent-only lens, and these are political choices. Read through the ICJ’s frame – science, equity, no-harm, precaution – they become legal ones: finance must be capable of delivering 1.5°C and repairing loss and damage, coal and subsidy policies must be plausibly 1.5°C-compatible, and the burden falls on governments to prove it.
CC BY-SA 4.0
Frydlinger, David
Advisory Opinion
Climate Crisis
ICJ
International Court of Justice
Internationaler Gerichtshof | Den Haag
Klimakatastrophe
State Responsibility
climate change
customary law
Internationaler Gerichtshof | Den Haag
Klimakatastrophe
342
https://verfassungsblog.de/closing-the-silences/
Verfassungsblog
2366-7044
Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH
10.59704/ca99ffd63031501e
250826
10.59704/ca99ffd63031501e
Converted from MARCXML to MODS version 3.7 using MARC21slim2MODS3-7.xsl
(Revision 1.140 20200717)